Dawn of thieves’

I think you're misinterpreting where some of them are coming from, actually.

It's also possible - my poor english is far not enough for the fine details...

As it seems, we are already at this point. But without our good, old spiked club

We got teeth.

Agreed. Furthemore, "property" is a legal fiction. For example, your body isn't your property, because you can't sell it.

However, I agree with Argent that IP rights are not completely antithetical to capitalism. I tend to believe it's not orthogonal, though -- i.e., completely independent. Lack of IP rights would discourage investment in many kinds of develoment for products that would be highly beneficial to society and the economy.

I'm far from an "unbridled capitalist". But I feel that IP rights are an important part of modern capitalism.

There's a technical term for this, when "those constructs" are embodied in laws: "legal fiction".

Interestingly, the term "fiction" derives from the same root as "fact". As used here, it does not mean "imaginary", but rather, connotes "invented".

Sure you can! And in some places, even legally!

Modern "Capitalism" is arguably misnamed.

I'm really wondering why Chris Norse hasn't poked his nose in. I've been dropping all kinds of libertarian bait.

Not in the US, you can't -- that would be considered slavery. And it's just an example to show that things we consider as our property are not, legally.

Seriously: your body is not your legal property. Ask any judge.

[Editited to laugh heartily at the joke I completely missed! +1 for you, you got me!]

Or nonexistant, according to many.

All I meant is capitalism in a technologically advanced world, where ideas are far more valuable than mere manufacturing capacity.

I work for a very large company that sells networking equipment, but actually makes very little of it. Without IP rights, our business model would fail miserably. As a result, you wouldn't be using the Internet. Few people would, and it wouldn't be what the Internet is today. It would be more like what it was when only universities were connected. Some may argue that would be better, especially if Argent and Lear weren't connected to any universities!

So, like, an economy based around information rather than capital. Wait a second...

grins

In a property there is more than just the right to sell it, there is also the right to destroy it.

Copyright laws are only a shabby "fix" to still allow thinkers to make a buck due to the tendencie for capitalism to only help devellop what brings money. The only problems that can be solved by capitalism are those that will turn a profit by being solved.

There is no profit to be made in creating and distributing vaccines to poor peoples. And that's the kind of values peoples stand for, sadly.


Communism is an IDEA, it's not automatically a synonym for USSR.

Also there are alternative to capitalism that are NOT a new USSR and do not rely entirely on the monetizing of goods, labor and... pretty much every fucking things we manage to dig from this planet.

Of course not. The USSR was never a Communist state. There's never been a Communist state.

I was clarifying for those who tend to answer we with Mac Cartyist meme.

Sure there is. It stabilises society as a whole, turns nations into producers, and generally raises the standard of living worldwide.

It's interesting that you bring up that example. Solving health problems in poor areas via vaccines is literally the best way, bar none, to end expensive wars, failed states and so forth, and all the associated costs that go with them to richer nations and their own people. This is why the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, for instance, got involved in it.

It's not "direct" profit, but likewise, if you stop some terrible disease it generally helps the richer nations too. Polio, tuberculosis, AIDS, all those things.

Some would argue that this is governance at its finest: people choosing as a society to work on the big, difficult issues of our time that exceed the powers of even the biggest businesses. For example, the space program. Billions spent, nations and corporations deeply, deeply involved... but everyone worldwide profits.

Communism just doesn't work ~ these things buck human nature to a degree that nobody's ever been able to implement ideas like that ~ in the process you get more deaths by it, than by any other social experiment known to man. Its true result in the attempts is totalitarianism, and more environmental damage than even western capitalism. Worst of all it's an ideology that promotes violence via revolution, and necessarily requires the destruction of everything as we know it.

Forget about Russian history entirely and study a bit of Chinese history ~ the institutionalised greed of the western world is nothing, compared to the institutionalised envy of billions, a world where rising up to be a doctor or lawyer was an insult to the have~nots. The net result of that experiment became the validation of some of the worst slash and burn capitalism the world has ever seen, as the pendulum swung the other way.

* * * * *

Interestingly enough, as easy as it is to copy digital things, the corporations and the capitalists still hold the final card.

Say Linden Research or the major telecoms simply decided to shrug, and say: forget it. This illusion of a free digital realm will vanish overnight.

And this sort of thing happens all the time, with the end result being an incredibly rude wake up call that base economic principles still apply.

You mean it enslave them to the global economy.


It was an example, there are countless "problems" we could solve but that we simply do not because it isn't profitable:
-Why are we still using aircrafts that eat fuel like a burning oil rig?
-Why most of the usa still drive in inefficient suvs.
-Actually, why do we still drive individual vehicles when we could build efficient, fast and silent maglev train networks to dispach anybody anywhere anytime?
-Why do we keep dumping plastics and trash in the ocean knowing that it creates gigantic floating dumps LIke the Northern pacific gyre?
-Why do we dump old nuclear reactors and submarines in the ocean instead of recycling them?
-Why do we keep making plastics while we have biodegradable equivalents?

All those example have "money" as answer, money and economy where a good concept to elevate us and motivate peoples while we where still in the dark ages of technology but today it's becoming a huge brake to the betterment of humanity.





Every change of system need to erase the previous system when both systems are completely opposed.

You can't be certain that it can't work, until the day we tried every single form of societies.
And so far we haven't tried that many.
Money is not in human nature, it's a tool to help things forward, like the carrot on a stick, the problem of our societies is that we are completely focused on the carrot and we forgot why it was there in the first place. Money is just a tool and at some point it will (if it hasn't already) become obsolete.



That's the common misconception that we can't have society free from money and labor and still thrive, in a good, technologically advanced society peoples could be free from the burden of labor and money AND live probably better than we live today where every day, save for a small elite is a fight to pay bills and taxes.



I don't think they have the power to pull the plug on all the communication system, sure, LL could shut down SL, but SL is nothing really.

People gotta eat. If you expect people to professionally create the things that are referred to as intellectual property, you have to set up a system by which they can make money creating those things.

Otherwise, these things will, at best, be created on an amateur, liesure-time, hobby-only basis without the benefit of extensive education and training.

I do expect humanity to grow out of the "must pay for food & roof" slavery. Our scientists make amazing breakthrough, we already replaced most of the hard labors by man made machines, we should continue this way and replace more and more labor work by machines.

this way only the machine owners can eat lol
everyone else will be broke..

I was waiting that one.

By the time we come to replace all the human work by machines we will reconsider the fact that, since the machines do the work for everyone, it's benefits should fall back on everyone.

And if the machine owner doesn't well, maybe the few billion starved peoples will do it for him.


two paths, one result.

you are forgetting ..the ones who own the machines will have the power that comes with them..
a united well fed army is stronger than a divided bunch of hungry rambos..there is never gonna be the perfect harmony with humans in control unless they have everyone under control like robots..

Soylent Green is made of peoples lol

Governments have always a lot of little traitors, erm... patriots to ensure their security, it doesn't mean they can't be overthrown.

You guys don't like reconsidering what the future could be, isn't it?

Actually, I believe it's legal in Nevada.

Actually SOCIALISM is an idea. And how exactly was the USSR not a Communist state?